Vivo X200 Pro mini vs iQOO 13

83 out of 100
Vivo X200 Pro mini
VS
85 out of 100
Vivo iQOO 13

Here we compared two flagship smartphones: the 6.31-inch Vivo X200 Pro mini (with MediaTek Dimensity 9400) that was released on October 14, 2024, against the Vivo iQOO 13, which is powered by Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite and came out 1 month after. On this page, you will find tests, full specs, strengths, and weaknesses of each of the devices.

Select the amount of RAM to evaluate performance and value for money more precisely
Memory

Key differences

An overview of the main advantages of each smartphone
Reasons to consider the Vivo X200 Pro mini
  • Handles wireless charging up to 30W
  • The rear camera has a 3x optical zoom
  • Reverse charging feature
  • Weighs 26 grams less
Reasons to consider the Vivo iQOO 13
  • Has a 0.51 inch larger screen size
  • Higher display refresh rate – 144 Hz
  • Supports higher wattage charging (120W versus 90W)
  • Slow-motion recording at 960FPS
  • 13% better performance in AnTuTu Benchmark (3150K versus 2779K)
  • 11% higher pixel density (510 vs 460 PPI)
  • Faster storage type - UFS 4.1 versus UFS 4.0

Review

Evaluation of Vivo X200 Pro mini and iQOO 13 crucial features
Display
Screen quality, color accuracy, brightness
Camera
Photo and video recording quality
Performance
CPU and memory performance (apps, system)
Gaming
Capabilities for playing modern games
Battery
Battery life, charging type and speed
Connectivity
Networks, ports, data transmission
Scores with a red asterisk (*) are approximate and may change in the future as we gather more data.
NanoReview Score
Final comparison evaluation
Select your primary usage scenario to get a more accurate NanoReview Score
πŸ“± Primary usage:

Value for money (Beta)

To get an accurate value-for-money index, update the default prices with actual prices from your country’s retailers (for the selected memory configs) and press the "Calculate" button.
Currency
12 / 256 GB
VS
12 / 256 GB
42.2
(Average)
Value Index
60.5
(Average)

Tests and specifications

Comparison table of technical specifications and tests

Display

Type AMOLED AMOLED
Size 6.31 inches 6.82 inches
Resolution 1216 x 2640 pixels 1440 x 3168 pixels
Aspect ratio 19.5:9 20:9
PPI 460 ppi 510 ppi
Refresh rate 120 Hz 144 Hz
Adaptive refresh rate Yes (1-120 Hz) Yes (1-144 Hz)
Max rated brightness - 1800 nits
Max rated brightness in HDR 4500 nits 4500 nits
HDR support Yes, Dolby Vision Yes, HDR10+
Touch sampling rate 300 Hz 360 Hz
Screen protection Tempered glass Schott Xensation Alpha
Screen-to-body ratio 90.3% 89.6%
Display features - DCI-P3
- Always-On Display
- DC Dimming
- DCI-P3
- Always-On Display
- DC Dimming
Display tests
RGB color space 99.8% -
PWM 361 Hz -
Response time 1 ms -
Contrast ∞ Infinity -
Screen space comparison
iQOO 13
6.82β€³ (20:9 ratio) = 17.4 in2
X200 Pro mini
6.31β€³ (19.5:9 ratio) = 15.1 in2
~14% more screen space
Peak brightness test (auto)
1805 nits
1798 nits
Sources: NotebookCheck [3]

Design and build

Height 150.8 mm (5.94 inches) 163.37 mm (6.43 inches)
Width 71.8 mm (2.83 inches) 76.71 mm (3.02 inches)
Thickness 8.2 mm (0.32 inches) 8.13 mm (0.32 inches)
Weight 187 g (6.6 oz) 213 g (7.51 oz)
Waterproof IP69 IP69
Advanced cooling Vapor chamber Vapor chamber
Rear material - Glass
Frame material Metal Metal
Colors White, Black, Green, Pink White, Black, Silver, Green
Fingerprint scanner Yes, in-display Yes, in-display
Screen-to-body ratio
90.3%
89.6%

Performance

Chipset specifications of Vivo X200 Pro mini and Vivo iQOO 13
SoC
Chipset MediaTek Dimensity 9400 Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite
Max clock 3630 MHz 4320 MHz
CPU cores 8 (1 + 3 + 4) 8 (2 + 6)
Architecture - 4 cores at 2.4 GHz: Cortex-A720
- 3 cores at 3.3 GHz: Cortex-X4
- 1 core at 3.62 GHz: Cortex-X925
- 6 cores at 3.53 GHz: Oryon (Phoenix M)
- 2 cores at 4.32 GHz: Oryon (Phoenix L)
L3 cache 12 MB 8 MB
Manufacturing TSMC TSMC
Lithography process 3 nanometers 3 nanometers
Neural processor (NPU) MediaTek NPU 890 Hexagon
GPU
Graphics Mali-G925 Immortalis MP12 Adreno 830
GPU shading units 1536 1536
GPU clock 1612 MHz 1100 MHz
FLOPS ~4952.1 GFLOPS ~3379.2 GFLOPS

Benchmarks

Benchmark comparison of Vivo X200 Pro mini and Vivo iQOO 13
Geekbench 6 (Single-Core)
iQOO 13 +7%
3008
Geekbench 6 (Multi-Core)
iQOO 13 +7%
9297
Compute Score (GPU)
iQOO 13 +9%
24763
Compute Score (GPU) 22758 24763
Single-core score 2819 3008
Multi-core score 8705 9297
Sources: Geekbench [3], [4]
AnTuTu Benchmark 11
2779129
iQOO 13 +13%
3150555
CPU 853223 903944
GPU 971718 1153744
Memory 348906 415491
UX 605282 677376
Total score 2779129 3150555
Samples [14 tests] [33 tests]
3DMark Steel Nomad Light
iQOO 13 +10%
2509
Stability 62% 77%
Graphics test 17 FPS 19 FPS
Graphics score 2283 2509
3DMark Solar Bay
iQOO 13 +13%
11463
Graphics test 39 FPS 44 FPS
Section 1 45 FPS 49 FPS
Section 2 40 FPS 44 FPS
Section 3 31 FPS 37 FPS
Graphics score 10156 11463
3DMark Wild Life Extreme
iQOO 13 +10%
6250
Stability 60% -
Graphics test 33 FPS 37 FPS
Graphics score 5665 6250
Sources: 3DMark [5], [6]
PCMark 3.0
iQOO 13 +8%
15763
Web score 13655 14234
Video editing 5778 6801
Photo editing 30547 39527
Data manipulation 12752 13253
Writing score 22229 20704
AnTuTu 11 Ranking List (134th and 83rd place)

Recent User Tests

The latest benchmark tests that have been submitted by users
Vivo X200 Pro mini
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-30 -> BronelliantAnTuTu 122833803
πŸ“˜ 2026-06-09 (adverse)AnTuTu 112857775
πŸ“˜ 2026-05-31 (elega)AnTuTu 112810299
πŸ“˜ 2026-05-24 (Tape)AnTuTu 112812729
πŸ“˜ 2026-05-07 (Oleg)AnTuTu 112820364
Vivo iQOO 13
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-25 (Asuna)AnTuTu 113203192
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-24 (Fenix)AnTuTu 123343403
πŸ“˜ 2026-08-15 (Kh)AnTuTu 113166164
πŸ“˜ 2026-08-03 (ShiNo_Maebure)AnTuTu 113090760
πŸ“˜ 2026-07-08 (Edward)AnTuTu 113239284

Memory

RAM
RAM size 12 GB 12 GB
Memory type LPDDR5X LPDDR5X
Memory clock 5300 MHz 5300 MHz
Channels 4 4
Storage
Storage size 256 GB 256 GB
Storage type UFS 4.0 UFS 4.1
Memory card No No

Software

Operating system Android 15 (Can be upgraded to Android 16) Android 15 (Can be upgraded to Android 16)
ROM OriginOS 6 Funtouch 16
OS size 55 GB -
OS updates 3 years 4 years
Security updates 3 years 5 years

Battery

Capacity 5700 mAh 6150 mAh
Max charge power 90 W 120 W
Battery type Silicon-Carbon (Si/C) Silicon-Carbon (Si/C)
Replaceable No No
Wireless charging Yes (30 W) No
Reverse charging Yes No
Bypass charging Yes No
Fast charging Yes (62% in 30 min) Yes (91% in 30 min)
Full charging time 0:52 hr 0:32 hr
Battery life tests
Web browsing 11:58 hr 14:22 hr
Watching video 18:31 hr 17:57 hr
Gaming 05:59 hr 08:12 hr
Standby 131 hr 129 hr
General battery life
28:40 hr
iQOO 13 +6%
30:28 hr

Main camera

Matrix 50 megapixels 50 megapixels
Image resolution 8192 x 6144 8192 x 6144
Zoom Optical, 3x Optical, 2x
Flash Dual LED Dual LED
Stabilization Optical Optical
8K video recording No Up to 30FPS
4K video recording Up to 120FPS Up to 60FPS
1080p video recording Up to 60FPS Up to 60FPS
Slow motion 240 FPS (1080p) 960 FPS (1080p)
Angle of widest lens 119Β° 119Β°
Lenses 1) Standard: 50 MP
2) Telephoto: 50 MP
3) Ultrawide: 50 MP
1) Standard: 50 MP
2) Telephoto: 50 MP
3) Ultrawide: 50 MP
Camera features - Bokeh mode
- Pro mode
- Bokeh mode
- Pro mode
- RAW support
Standard lens
Image resolution 50 MP 50 MP
Aperture f/1.6 f/1.9
Focal length 23 mm 23 mm
Sensor Sony LYT-818 Sony IMX921
Sensor size 1/1.28" (β‰ˆ 0.78 inch) 1/1.56" (β‰ˆ 0.64 inch)
Pixel size 1.22 micron 1 micron
Autofocus Laser autofocus Phase autofocus
Stabilization Optical Optical
Telephoto lens
Image resolution 50 MP 50 MP
Aperture f/2.6 f/1.9
Focal length 70 mm 50 mm
Sensor Sony IMX882 Sony IMX816
Sensor size 1/1.95" (β‰ˆ 0.51 inch) 1/2.51" (β‰ˆ 0.4 inch)
Pixel size 0.7 micron 0.64 micron
Stabilization Optical Optical
Ultra-wide lens
Image resolution 50 MP 50 MP
Aperture f/2.0 f/2.0
Focal length 15 mm 15 mm
Sensor Samsung S5KJN1 Samsung S5KJN1
Sensor size 1/2.76" (β‰ˆ 0.36 inch) 1/2.76" (β‰ˆ 0.36 inch)
Pixel size 0.64 micron 0.64 micron
Stabilization Digital Digital

Selfie camera

Megapixels 32 megapixels 32 megapixels
Image resolution 6528 x 4896 6528 x 4896
Aperture f/2.0 f/2.2
Focal length 20 mm 28 mm
Sensor Samsung KD1 GalaxyCore GC32E1
Sensor size 1/3.44" (β‰ˆ 0.29 inch) 1/3.1" (β‰ˆ 0.32 inch)
Pixel size - 0.7 micron
Autofocus No No
Stabilization Digital Digital
Video resolution 2160p (4K) at 60 FPS 2160p (4K) at 60 FPS
Depth sensor (TOF 3D) No No

Connectivity

Wi-Fi standard Wi-Fi 7 (802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be) Wi-Fi 7 (802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be)
Wi-Fi features - Dual Band
- Wi-Fi MiMO
- Wi-Fi Direct
- Wi-Fi Hotspot
- Wi-Fi Display
- Dual Band
- Wi-Fi MiMO
- Wi-Fi Direct
- Wi-Fi Hotspot
- Wi-Fi Display
Bluetooth version 5.4 5.4
Bluetooth features LE LE
USB type USB Type-C USB Type-C
USB version 2 3.2
USB features - Charging
- USB-Storage mode
- OTG
- Charging
- USB-Storage mode
- OTG
DisplayPort No Yes
GPS GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS, NAVIC GPS, GLONASS, Beidou, Galileo, QZSS
NFC* Yes Yes
Infrared port Yes Yes
Network
Number of SIM* 2 2
Type of SIM card Nano Nano
Multi SIM mode Standby Standby
eSIM support* No No
Hybrid slot No No
5G support Yes Yes

Sound

Speakers Stereo Stereo
Headphone audio jack No No
FM radio No No
Dolby Atmos No No
Speakers test
Max loudness
85.7 dB
n/a

Other

Category Flagship Flagship
Announced October 2024 October 2024
Release date October 2024 November 2024
Launch price (MSRP) $649 $650
Successor - - Vivo iQOO 15
Sensors - Proximity sensor
- Gyroscope
- Accelerometer
- Ambient light sensor
- Compass
- Fingerprint
- Proximity sensor
- Gyroscope
- Accelerometer
- Ambient light sensor
- Compass
- Fingerprint
Bundled charger Yes, 90 W Yes, 120 W
Further details
Notes on iQOO 13:
    - Only the 16/512 GB variant has UFS 4.1 storage; the rest use UFS 4.0.
*Disclaimer! NFC, GSM network support, and some other specs can be different depending on the country.

Conclusion

If the gaming and battery life are more important to you, then choose the Vivo iQOO 13. But if the camera, design, and sound are more of a priority – go for the Vivo X200 Pro mini.

Cast your vote

So, which phone would you choose?
99 (67.3%)
48 (32.7%)
Total votes: 147

User opinions

You can share your opinion or ask a question in the comments below
🌐 Register your profile and become part of NanoReview community!
Paih May 4, 2025 at 12:45 AM
I still can't decide on which is better πŸ’”
+1 Reply
Hi10 July 23, 2025 at 10:56 AM
Vivo is better.
0 Reply